DVDActive uses cookies to remember your actions, such as your answer in the poll. Cookies are
also used by third-parties for statistics, social media and advertising. By using this website, it is
assumed that you agree to this.

Confessions of a PT Apologist

My name is Gabe Powers, and I am a Star Wars Prequel Trilogy Apologist...

The following is an editorial. The views and opinions of the author do not necessarily represent those of DVDActive.com. The author is not an expert or scientific professional, and his or her words are meant for entertainment purposes only.

Reader discretion is advised.

‘I am a Star Wars Prequel Trilogy Apologist. Hath not a Star Wars Prequel Trilogy Apologist eyes? Hath not a Star Wars Prequel Trilogy Apologist hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same blue milk, hurt with the same DL-44 blaster pistol, subject to the same Krytos virus', healed by the same bacta, warmed and cooled by the same Tatooine and Hoth as any unaltered OT fanatic? If you prick our robotic hands do they not quiver in verification of stimulation? If you run us through with a double bladed lightsaber do we not cauterize instantly and fall dead without bleeding? If you destroy our planet with your super-powered, planet sized space station do we not die?’

Part One: The Delusional Nuisance

I hereby call to order this meeting of SWPTAA ( Star Wars Prequel Trilogy Apologists Anonymous). We have a new member joining us tonight. This brings our standing total to three. Would you like to introduce yourself?

My name is Gabe Powers, and I am a Star Wars Prequel Trilogy Apologist. (‘Hi Gabe’) It has been three months, two weeks, and three days since the last time I watched the Prequel Trilogy. My story starts the day I was born. The number one film in America was The Empire Strikes Back, and my foolish parents decided to take me to the theatre to see it while I was still in an infantile state. I don't blame them, though, it was Star Wars. I don’t remember the experience, obviously, but apparently the film burned itself thoroughly into my colour blind, non-cognitive little mind. Over the next eight years I spent my time creating new Star Wars adventures with my toy collection (I wasn’t allowed action figures with guns, but ‘blasters’ and ‘laser swords’ were okay). At the age of three I got to see the final instalment of the Star Wars series, Return of the Jedi in a theatre, though my mother made me leave the theatre temporarily during the Rancor scene, which she had read was scary.

George Lucas never touched my childhood in the bathing suit area.

At the age of ten I finally felt I had outgrown Star Wars (I was much more interested in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Ghostbusters by that time), and sold my entire toy collection (including the ghost Anakin Skywalker and Emperor figures you had to send away proof of purchases to get) to my collector uncle for the hefty sum of $100, which is a lot of money for a ten year old in the year 1990. I’ve since realized it was a mistake. It seemed the closest I was ever going to get to a new Star Wars movie were two awful made for video Ewok flicks, which I enjoyed as a child but now recognize as unwatchable tripe (except the monsters, those are still cool. Remember that stop-motion thing that tried to get the little bastards in the tree?). I went on with my life, only reliving a small part of the series when I was left home sick from school. Empire and Ghostbusters were the only two videos my family owned, and daytime television is awful.

Along came college, and my interest in film beyond occasional entertainment, specifically horror films, bloomed into a full-on obsession. This obsession led me to film related magazines and websites where I learned that George Lucas was in fact making a series of three prequels to the original Star Wars Trilogy. My interest was reinvigorated, thanks in no small part to my college roommate, whose father worked at a local grocery store and ‘borrowed’ the Phantom Menace promos on his son’s behalf. It’s hard not to get excited about a film when life-size Pepsi stand-up versions of its characters watch TV with you every night. For an entire summer I didn't throw out a Pepsi can without making sure it didn't feature a golden Yoda.

I lived close to a brand new theatre in Phoenix, Arizona (at the Metro Center Mall, where Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure had been filmed), and would take a trip to Suncoast Video every Tuesday to check out new releases. I decided I wasn’t going to see The Phantom Menace opening weekend when I saw a small line of people forming two weeks before release. Two weeks! There was no way this, or any film was going to be worth this much time in the Phoenix sun.

After about a week the fan line filled out into the dozens, and the mall management decided to let them inside, even overnight (apparently a bunch of unbathed people in Storm Trooper costumes and brown robes expiring on the front steps isn’t good for business). The geeks were partitioned off in the food court, like some kind of surrealist Science Fictional zoo attraction. I felt like I had walked onto the Preserver's ship, and half expected to find Superman behind glass. You had to walk around the geeks and through a gaggle of pre-teen mallrat goslings to enter the consumer utopia. The early word from these emporium barnacles was that the film was awesome, a juggernaut of satisfaction, and I had to take their word for it because I was going to wait another two weeks before I was going to pass my own judgment.

I was too concerned with bleeding all the local video stores dry of obscure foreign horror titles (one store had both Necromantic movies, and I only had to drive forty minutes there and back to rent them!) and finishing school to have even noticed the vehement hatred of all things Phantom Menace throughout the rest of 1999. I saw the film twice that year, the second time with a troop of ankle-biters from the local day-care I worked at, and they ate it up. I tried to show them the OT on video in the coming weeks but they were bored out of their minds. Little bastards. Before the Episode 1 DVD was finally released some time later I had finally been made aware that people really didn’t like the film. At that point it was really too late for me to care.

Then came November of 2001, and I sat down in a theatre full of screaming toddlers to see Pixar Studios’ Monsters Inc.. I never miss a Pixar film. The trailers ran, the theatre promo came and went, I was told to buy stuff from the concession stands and turn off my cell phone, then the screen went black. But then there was another green trailer screen. The following Attack of the Clones trailer is, in my opinion, one of the most effective trailers ever made. The images edited to the familiar rhythmic breathing of Darth Vader, the building music, glimpses of Jango Fett, C-3PO, and holy shit, was that Christopher Lee? I was born ready for May of 2002.

Due to a lack of lines I decided to see Attack of the Clones the Saturday after it opened. By the time the credits rolled Lucas’ baited hook was firmly caught within the fleshy tissues of inner cheek. I was a born again Star Wars fan. I saw it three times total, once with my mother (and I didn't even make her leave the theatre during the monster scenes). I am ashamed and humbled when I admit that it was Attack of the Clones, that reinvigorated my fanaticism for the series.

The day I downloaded the final HD trailer for Episode III: Revenge of the Sith my failing health was looking up, and I found a quiet complacency in knowing my friend George was going to be there for me in my time of need. Attending a few midnight showings of the Lord of the Rings films had fuelled my appetite, and I bought tickets for the first showing of the final Star Wars film. A friend and I got to the theatre at 9:00 PM and were shocked to hear that the theatre had been seating for over an hour already. It was okay though, we got decent seats, and some kindly strangers paid us twenty bucks a piece to hold seats for them (they came back drunk). I embarrassingly watched costumed freaks make spectacles of themselves, and laughed like a drug-addled hyena as one theatregoer tripped and spilled his popcorn in a glorious arc across the front row. The movie came and went, and once again, I enjoyed myself immensely.

Part Two: Blitzkrieg of the Facsimiles

How could I have been so wrong? What good did I see in these cinematic equivalents to Auschwitz? I try to explain this to the hordes of angry OT fans that egg my house every night, I try to put this unbelievable affection into words, and time and time again I fail. Come with me my friends, on a Technicolor journey of over-analysis.

I enjoy A New Hope and the Prequel Trilogy for pretty much the same reasons I enjoy Tarantino’s Kill Bill series. I like straight-faced, postmodern homage. I’m not a very big fan of spoof, and most blatantly referential cinema is spoof. If I were to critique Grindhouse it’d read as pretty much the exact opposite of most opinions I’ve come across. I think Rodriguez’s Planet Terror was entertaining but missed the point of the exercise. It was a spoof of exploitation cinema rather than an homage. Tarantino’s Death Proof is a modern equivalent to a grindhouse film, complete with space filling exposition and an entirely abrupt ending. It may be winking at its audience a bit, but I don’t see it as dishonest as a spoof.

Empire Strikes Back is more or less universally accepted as the best of the Star Wars series. I agree that it is the best film with the word Star Wars in the title. I would, however, argue (against my better judgment) that it is actually the worst Star Wars film. It’s too realistic, too emotionally centred, too well acted, too well structured, and too empathetic. It's a real movie, with real characters that an audience really cares for. Return of the Jedi, Ewoks aside, has a solid and I believe affecting emotional core, that of Luke and Vader. Though generations of fans focus on the Ewoks as the negative aspect, I see them as more true to Lucas’ model than the rest of the film, and they even play into the ‘60s leftist political stance found in the PT.

The four movies in the series that were actually directed by Lucas are stylistically and thematically very similar. They feel like old movies with new special effects. The acting is purposefully stilted, the dialogue is corny, and the situations entirely fantastic within the realms of pop familiarity. Attack of the Clones is especially attuned to the notion of homage in that it effectively references dozens of film types, from ’30s era romance and swashbuckling, to ‘50s era, stop-motion monster movies and ‘60s era James Bond flicks. The romance is the one and only factor that even I can’t argue works, but it is definitely played out in the old fashion mould.

The final act of the PT (the one people actually seemed to have liked) diverts from this formula (the way I see it Attack of the Clones and A New Hope are the ‘purest’ Star Wars films), and goes more for an operatic representation of such unbelievable events. I thought this worked, many people did not. It’s overwrought, but then, so is just about every famous Opera ever written. Like Empire and Jedi (my two favourites), it takes the formula and matures it to a place where maybe it doesn’t belong. It's almost like, a real movie.

I think people wanted Star Wars to grow up with them, but that’s not what Star Wars is about, at least not the way I was made to understand it.

I once tried to explain the merits of digital effects to a kid on line at a comic book store. He slashed my neck with a Magic: The Gathering card protected within a thick mylar sleeve. I still bare the scare to remind me to keep my mouth shut. I learned a valuable lesson that day—people take the Star Wars universe very, very seriously. Why, just minutes before the incident I was having a civil discussion with my attacker about abortion rights. We disagreed by the guy didn't raise a finger, I mention the fact that I like digital Yoda and BAM, I wake up in the hospital.

From a visual standpoint, I believe the digital realm has afforded the PT a wonderful painterly feel, and I find it hard to believe that even the harshest critics honestly found the films graphically unattractive. The digital set designs are gorgeous, often evoking sci-fi fantasy novel covers from the ‘50s and ‘60s. They also evoke the painted backdrops of ‘30s serials, and are uncannily unrealistic yet tangible. The overall colour pallets of the three films represent a day to night transition ( TPM equals day, AOTC equals dawn, ROTS equals night). I'll never understand the critical stance that praised Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow and Sin City for their all digital backdrops, while bashing the PT for the same reasons. There are other moments of real graphic purity in these films, like the beautiful cutting of flashing colours and faces when Anakin and Dooku first face-off in Attack of the Clones.

I absolutely agree that this is in contrast to the OT, where everything was rough and dirty, but I was under the impression that that was kind of the point—there’s no room for aesthetic beauty in Palpatine’s Empire, a function over fashion kind of thing (even the Emperor himself ditches his flowing red robe for a dull black one). Maybe I'm the guy taking this all too seriously now.

I was also under the impression that the Star Wars films, as a whole, were suppose to be old fashion serials from every angle except that of their state of the art special effects. This is the mindset I’ve taken to these films since I was old and wise enough to think critically about such a mundane subject, I may be wrong. This mindset is what causes me to object to the digital changes in the OT. The OT changes don’t bother me exponentially, but from a theoretical standpoint they go against my version of the series ‘thesis statement’. I'm of the theory that each film should represent the height of special effects technology for its given time. The effects in Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon were the best for their eras, right? That’s a story for another support group though.

Though I love a Muppet as much as the next guy, the puppets in the OT were only ever as real as their performers and the performances around them, and the same goes for the digital creatures of the PT. Jar Jar isn’t a bad character because he’s made out of CG rather than rubber, he’s a bad character because he’s badly written and annoyingly realized. I was just as enthralled by Yoda’s performance in parts two and three as I was in part five, because the character is well written, beloved, and Frank Oz is a great actor. I've actually heard people say that they didn't like the digital creatures because they weren't as 'realistic; as the rubber creatures in the OT. At the risk of grievous bodily harm, I'll say that I honestly think the end results of both the OT and PT are comparably ‘realistic’.

Do fans want more grown-up versions of the exact same three movies they fell in love with in the '70s and '80s? Do they want to pick and choose their specific favourite elements? Do they want rubber masked thespians, rod puppets, and stop-motion monsters speaking David Mamet level dialogue? This isn't me being facetious; I actually want an answer because I don't know.

On a completely unpretentious and non-analytical level, it comes down to taste. Good almost always outweighs bad per capita for me, and that's probably the reason I can enjoy so many Italian horror flicks. I can actually enjoy an entire film for a few good set pieces. The Star Wars Prequels have plenty of bits I don't enjoy, I’m not entirely insane, but each film has its fair share of bits I love. This is not a matter of lowering my expectations; this is a matter of me appreciating films in parts more than most folks I know. Just so we agree my taste is in question, rather than my methods.

Let's get down to brass tacks; here are some images I'll always remember:

The Phantom Menace: the giant fish scene (minus Jar Jar's screaming), R2-D2’s introduction (I know it’s short, but watching R2 units blasted off the wing of the ship is always good for a laugh), the pod race (as an exercise in image and sound, it doesn't get much better), and the final saber match (still not matched).

Attack of the Clones: the flying car chase, all of Obi-Wan’s ‘secret agent’ bits on Kamino, anything involving Christopher Lee, and the film’s final act where we go from Harryhausen monster movie, to full-on war film, to awesome Yoda vs. Dooku saber fight.

Revenge of the Sith is a film I honestly love. I don’t love it in that ‘at least it’s not as bad as the others’ way, I really, honestly adore it. I love its structure, I love its story, and I love its best bits more than any of the other best bits in the Prequel Trilogy. The opening rescue, Obi-Wan’s stalking and killing of Grievous, Anakin’s turn (I must be crazy, because I bought it), the purge (that score is heartbreaking), the flashy, and colour-coated final battle. I even thought Vader’s James Whale-esque birth and subsequent giant ‘No’ was spot on.

I love these movies for what they mean to me, not what they mean to the legions of die-hard fans the world over. That is why I honestly think future generations will forget the anti-hype and embrace the entire series as two separate but strangely equal wholes.

That’s not to say I wouldn’t change a few things if given the chance…

Part 3: Counterinsurgency of the Reason

After month of intensive consoling, drying up, and heavy medication, I'm finally able to admit that my love for the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy is not unshakable. I've found some problems with the films, and at the suggestion of my sponsor Blake (thanks for being there for me all those late nights brother, and thank your wife for the cookies), and because it is step six in my twelve step program, I've compiled a list of things I'd like to see Lucas change when he eventually starts tinkering with the PT. I've broken each down by film.

The Phantom Menace: While watching the documentary on the Phantom Menace DVD, I noticed there were two other finalists for the role of young Anakin Skywalker. Both young actors seem better equipped for the role. I propose that ILM digitally insert one of these children into all of Jake Lloyd's scenes.

I'm pretty sure that no one here is a very big fan of Jar Jar Binks. I totally understand the point of the character; he's meant as another Kurosawa-esque servant character who acts as the audience's eyes through the fantastic journey. Unfortunately he's no C-3P0 or R2-D2, and if this is how Lucas views his audience, we really all should be a little insulted. I suggest the character design remain the same, but he be re-voiced and reanimated as a more soft-spoken character, preferably one that isn't a racial stereotype. If racial stereotypes are a necessity, then I suggest a Japanese character, in keeping with those in Kurosawa's Hidden Fortress.

More time should be spent on the political intricacies of Darth Sideous' plan. Way too much screen time is devoted to frivolous scenes on Tatooine and the Gungan city (though the pod race and giant fish scenes that follow are cool). I understand that the plot against the Republic was meant to unfold over the first two films, but Lucas spends way too much time explaining this part of the story on his DVD commentary track.

Though the fact that the destruction of the droid mothership shuts down the droids attacking Naboo is important to Palpatine's choice in clones over droids, I wish that the Gungans could have actually been victorious during the Battle of Naboo. Anakin accidentally saving an entire planet is weak storytelling all around.

Darth Maul is too cool to die in the first film, and playing hours and hours of the Battlefront 2 video game planted the awesome idea of him as a general in the Clone Wars. The guy is raised to kill Jedi from, like, birth, and he gets offed by the second one he comes across? Obi-Wan should probably still get the best of him, but he shouldn't have died (there's a neat 'what-if' comic short I read where Maul is repaired with a robot lower half and confronts an older Obi-Wan on Tatooine). Palpatine could just break the rule of two and take on Dooku anyway as the wealthy ex-Jedi is politically more powerful than Maul, but Maul as the ultimate, war-time heavy would've been great fun. We can insert him digitally, and give him spider legs or something.

Attack of the Clones I've never had a particular problem with Hayden Christianson's whiny portrayal of teenaged Anakin. It seems appropriate to me that the early reasons for his downfall are his normal teenage behaviour, including rebellion against authority figures and having a childish crush on the wrong girl. These are all things that the Jedi should figuratively beat out of force sensitive youths at a very young age, but Anakin is just too old when he's finally trained. I actually wouldn't change this aspect of the film at all.

I would remove the frivolous and tacked on droid factory sequence, and replace it with the DVD's deleted scenes of Anakin and Padme getting to know each other. The love story should be sappy and old fashion (Han and Leia's was, no matter how you remember it), but it can stand to be a little more heartfelt. And the droid factory sequence is dumb.

I also would've taken the time to hire a few martial arts experts to fill out my Jedi armada rather than craft services and members of N'Sync. When Mace Windu comes to Anakin, Obi-Wan, and Padme's rescue his Jedi soldier look a little, um, 'unrefined'. Then imagine Windu and Jango Fett fighting as they do, Obi-Wan (having just killed that screaming spider-monster) rushes to Windu assistance, but stops short as a black cloaked character (who had been lurking at Dukoo's side the whole film) lands hard in front of him. The character removes his cowl to reveal a newly repaired Darth Maul. He could tear through a couple of the lesser Jedi on his way to Obi-Wan, who'd be nearly overpowered. This time Obi-Wan would barely escape to join Anakin on the trail of Dooku.

Revenge of the Sith General Grievous, no matter how cool looking he may be, is frivolous, and the film's weakest story element. He serves only two purposes—a Darth Vader prototype (part machine, part organic creature), and a reason to separate Anakin and Obi-Wan, who at this point in the story arc are actually getting along. Though the sequence where Anakin kills Dooku is important, Dooku is a more valuable and well structured character, and should've been the one that Obi-Wan confronted on Utapau. This would feed Anakin’s frustration further, as he would find himself unable to avenge his missing limb. I'd replace Dooku in the rescue scene with my new hypothetical Robo-Maul, who Anakin would behead at Palpatine's behest as revenge for the death of Qui-Gon Jinn, thus making the same upsetting lurch towards the Dark Side.

Though I still love the operatic drama of the scene, I probably would've made the saber duel between Windu and Palpatine a bit more spectacular. I like Lucas' re-cutting the original footage to not have Anakin in the room the whole fight, but wish that we'd have a glimpse at Palatine's real power before he threw the fight for Anakin’s benefit. Even as a PT apologist I find Lucas' handling of such an important battle very weak.

I like Anakin’s initial fall, but like everyone else I wanted to actually see the new Darth Vader offing Jedi in the temple. We don't need to see him murdering children (that scene works perfectly as is), but a few short duels with Jedi like Shaak Ti would've been appropriate.

If you'll excuse me I've got a few other support groups to get to, including ‘Remaining Puny Banner Together’, my biweekly Hulk group, ‘Our Love is Real’, my Friday night A.I.: Artificial Intelligence group, and the latest addition to my self-help repertoire, ‘Symbiotes Are OK and So Am I’, my tri-weekly Spider-Man 3 group. Coffee and donuts are available in the back, if anyone cares to talk constructively among themselves on how to deal with the ever growing problem of Prequel Trilogy Apologism.

Advertisements

Comments

Reply

Message

Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.

I know that this article is long past being new, but I wandered over here today, in the midst of a vehement resurgence of my love of Star Wars (caused, not as you may suspect by the release of The Clone Wars, but of a local TV station screening the series over 6 weeks, and me deciding to play through LEGO Star Wars again - what can I say? It's a fun game! But I digress...).

I would like to say THANK YOU for such a refreshing article! As someone who also loves the PT (and may or may not have watched all three of my DVDs of them 3+ times this last week *cough*), I'm sick of seeing it so hated by supposed 'fans'. Yes, the originals are fantastic, and classic. But if so many fans love them so much, how can they not love a whole new 3 chapters to the story? How can they possibly not crave that? Crazy! I know I have, ever since I first realised the odd numbering of the OT and wondered where I-III were. I admit I first saw the OT when my Dad took me along to the 1997 theatrical releases with the assurance that I just "had" to see such classics. I was blown away by their awesome, and being unspoiled at that stage, got the full impact of the ESB and RotJ revelations.

When the PT was announced, I was ecstatic. Admittedly, I was no hardcore fangirl by then, but I'd seen the OT several times and it was a big part of getting me into Sci-fi, and as a result, setting me on my chosen career path. I couldn't wait to see them. To be honest, seeing Phantom Menace at the theatre was an incredible experience. Two years of waiting were plenty, I can't imagine what I'd have been like having to wait 16 years...and maybe that has something to do with people's disappointment in it, I don't know. I mean, ok, I didn't particularly like Jar Jar then. But after seeing I, II, and III now, I can comfortably say that I really don't mind him, and he IS meant to be annoying. That's his character, I accept that now. Oh, and YES!! Darth Maul is the coolest Sith in the whole series! Wanting to find out more about him is part of the reason why I think my recent obsession might steer me towards Expanded Universe, when I'd never even known it existed before this week. Oh boy, what am I getting my self into...

Ahhh, anyway, this wasn't meant to be so rambling of a response, I was just going to praise your awesomely awesome article (which I agree with almost the entirety of), and add extra emphasis to the Darth Maul love. But I got carried away, haha sorry! And thanks for writing this!

Not to read too much into it, but Anakin is emotionally stunted. He's more like a 12 year old when it comes to love.

Re-watching the films for this article I honestly don't think Christiansen sucked, he actually did quite a good job for what he was directed to do. I think the issues with his performance have more to do with the character and dialogue than the acting. We all know the guy's a good actor outside of these films. I don't see the performance being his problem but Lucas'.

Hehe, I wouldn't worry about that guy too much. He can't even get his facts straight re the X-Men (I don't remember Archangel being an early member of the X-men. Angel yes, but not Archangel).

There's a reason that things aren't literally adapted for the screen: it would look f**king stupid. As Cyclops said, 'would you prefer yellow spandex?' I thought I was a miserable obsessive geek, but I've got nothing on Matt Stilwell.

ahossein wrote: The love story in AOTC is represented as 2 teenagers in love who don't know what they are doing the dialogue represents the awkwardness in the forbidden love, with Han and Leia their is nothing forbidden and they are much older and you get a much more mature romance, and they both have nothing to lose.

They're not teenagers; Anakin is 20 and Padme is 24. The dialogue is wooden because Lucas wrote it and the acting sucked.

Matt Stilwell wrote: Cheddar J. Cheese wrote:Quote: Every single movie with Ben Affleck in it has sucked hard, and everyone here knows it. Chasing Amy? Good Will Hunting? Shakespeare in Love? Dazed and Confused?

My appologies, I misunderstood, although I wasn't attempting to have a go just pointing out in a jokey way how some people will fly off the handle when an opinion is aired different to their own.

Amusingly, I got the impression that his complaints about Nicholson and Ledger as they aren't consistently using the same actors, and every sequal, remake, reboot should use the same set of actors. I'm personally looking forward to a future Batman film with Batman himself played by a 90 year old Michael Keaton:D

I meant to comment on this last Thur or so, but I had forgotten my login and it took all weekend for the email to get to me.

Anyways, I thought this was a great article, there is something to love in all six movies, and I'm of a small but growing minority that feels The Phantom Menace is the most "fun" of the prequels.

While there were several grievous (narf) missteps in the writing and directing and acting and editing and scoring, well you get the picture, they're still a decent set of flicks. I'll keep my DVDs, but I'm still waiting for a proper presention of the unaltered trilogies on DVD.

Please allow me to clarify, I love Batman '89. I have no problems with Jack Nicholson's performance whatsoever. It was a unique interpretation of the character, and one I grew up with, loving it. But he was going on about how Heath Ledger won't be accurate to the comics, but Jack Nicholson was. And the comics don't have the Burton "Jack Napier" character. That's all I meant.

Matt Stilwell wrote: Spiderman - he does not shoot the webs out of his arms. That's Spiderman 2099. A completely different character. Plausibility, I'm sure every teenager would be able to identify with someone their own age who can build a wrist web launcher.Quote: And the Green Goblin is supposed to have purple boots, purple gloves, purple tunic, and green arms and legs. Not all high tech like in the movie. I dunno about you, but I wouldn't want to see Willem Dafoe in a puple tunic. I appreciate the source material, but some things just cannot get a literal adaptation.Quote: Venom's human part, Eddie Brock, is supposed to be a muscled athlete not stick thin, completely dorky Eric Forman. What difference does it make?Quote: Don't even get me started on Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane. What was so wrong? Quote: But please tell me that the annoying Bryce Dallas Howard character is killed by Spiderman like in the comic. Have you seen the movie?

Quote: X-Men - their costumes didn't look anything like they do in the comics and the characters were all messed up. Spandex is passé, what can you do? Quote: Iceman was way too young and not part of the team from the beginning. Storm didn't have the long, flowing silver hair or african accent like she's supposed to. There was no Archangel....till the last movie. He was supposed to be a member of the team from the beginning as was the Beast. Magneto's costume didn't look anything like the red and purple suit he has in the comics. And Anna Paquin as Rogue is just too stupid. She is supposed to have a Louisianian accent and be ten or fifteen years older. Not an expert on the X-Men, but come on...Quote: Iron Man - Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark ? That would be like having Jessica Simpson play a scientist or Britney Spears play a talented singer.

The new Batman movie that's coming out - Heath Ledger is the Joker. First you have Jack Nicholson as the Joker, now...this ? And they wonder why people are talking trash (ie. telling the truth) about movies. So you've seen these then? That's the only way you'd be able to judge them. As a Batman fan, I can't wait to see what Heath is able to do with the Joker. Jack Nicholson wasn't really the Joker... Last time I checked, the Joker didn't run a mafia and have a name, and dance to Prince... How about you wait for the movies to come out before you judge them, hmmm?

Quote: Icredible Hulk - the cgi hulk was horrible. Looked too much like the actor playing Bruce. And he is not supposed to have a superhero dad. Wasn't in the comics. Heaven forbid the Hulk looks like who he is... I mean, he only gets muscular and green, he doesn't change into another person like on the TV show. Why wouldn't he look like who he is? His father, a superhero... Ok there...Quote: Daredevil - need I remind everyone what complete garbage this was ? No, we still have the scars... I agree with you here. A waste of celluloid. Quote: Every single movie with Ben Affleck in it has sucked hard, and everyone here knows it. Chasing Amy? Good Will Hunting? Shakespeare in Love? Dazed and Confused?Quote: The Daredevil costume was alright but a black guy as Kingpin ? I don't think so. Who cares? I mean, if they can do the job better than a white person, what does it matter? Quote: I love Michael Clarke Duncan in most of his other movies, with the obvious exception of the trash Planet of the apes "film" While nothing can surpass the original, this was decent in its own right. Quote: but Kingpin is supposed to be an short, enormously fat white guy, not a tall, muscled, thin-by-comparison black guy. Michael Clarke Duncan is a great actor, but not for a character that is supposed to be white. I hate it when they change a character like this. Again, if they can get the job done as well or better than someone who physically looks the part, then why the Hell not?Quote: Bottom line....if it's not in the comics, it should be in the movie. This statement just doesn't make any sense... I assume you meant shouldn't.Quote: The hero's costumes should look exactly like they do in the comics. When real, true fans of a comic go to see the movie, they expect to see the characters looking like they're supposed to. They'd all look pretty silly, and no one would go and see the movies, unfortunately. I mean, yeah, I'd be pissed if Two-Face turned out to be a robot with an exposed robotic side of his face, but a lot of the stuff you're getting worked up over is insignificant. Well, to me anyways.

Now that that's done.

Great article Gabe, I agree with a lot of what you said, both positive and negative. It's amazing to see how 3-6 movies have actually changed peoples' lives and whatnot.

Anyways, I'll gladly sign up. Also, might I join the "A.I." and "HULK" club? I also enjoyed "Spider-Man 3", what about that club? Any room left?

"I'll never understand the critical stance that praised Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow and Sin City for their all digital backdrops, while bashing the PT for the same reasons."

People didn't bash Sky Captain because they didn't mess with a film/series of films that people have loved for thirty some years, the way that all recent comic movies have destroyed real, true fans' hearts.

Spiderman - he does not shoot the webs out of his arms. That's Spiderman 2099. A completely different character. And the Green Goblin is supposed to have purple boots, purple gloves, purple tunic, and green arms and legs. Not all high tech like in the movie. Venom's human part, Eddie Brock, is supposed to be a muscled athlete not stick thin, completely dorky Eric Forman. Don't even get me started on Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane. But please tell me that the annoying Bryce Dallas Howard character is killed by Spiderman like in the comic.

X-Men - their costumes didn't look anything like they do in the comics and the characters were all messed up. Iceman was way too young and not part of the team from the beginning. Storm didn't have the long, flowing silver hair or african accent like she's supposed to. There was no Archangel....till the last movie. He was supposed to be a member of the team from the beginning as was the Beast. Magneto's costume didn't look anything like the red and purple suit he has in the comics. And Anna Paquin as Rogue is just too stupid. She is supposed to have a Louisianian accent and be ten or fifteen years older.

Iron Man - Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark ? That would be like having Jessica Simpson play a scientist or Britney Spears play a talented singer.

The new Batman movie that's coming out - Heath Ledger is the Joker. First you have Jack Nicholson as the Joker, now...this ? And they wonder why people are talking trash (ie. telling the truth) about movies.

Icredible Hulk - the cgi hulk was horrible. Looked too much like the actor playing Bruce. And he is not supposed to have a superhero dad. Wasn't in the comics.

Daredevil - need I remind everyone what complete garbage this was ? Every single movie with Ben Affleck in it has sucked hard, and everyone here knows it. The Daredevil costume was alright but a black guy as Kingpin ? I don't think so. I love Michael Clarke Duncan in most of his other movies, with the obvious exception of the trash Planet of the apes "film" but Kingpin is supposed to be an short, enormously fat white guy, not a tall, muscled, thin-by-comparison black guy. Michael Clarke Duncan is a great actor, but not for a character that is supposed to be white. I hate it when they change a character like this.

Bottom line....if it's not in the comics, it should be in the movie. The hero's costumes should look exactly like they do in the comics. When real, true fans of a comic go to see the movie, they expect to see the characters looking like they're supposed to.

2001! A film with long stretches where nothing happens so it must be great!

Just kidding. I love 2001 but it's a completely different genre of film. Sci-fi vs. Fantasy. It would be like comparing Spartacus to Jason and the Argonauts.

And Titanic was a victim of the "it's a huge hit so it must be bad" school of thinking. I'm not the biggest fan the film but the sheer amont of vitriol that film gets is based largely on that - people who want to bask in their own superiority just because they didn't fall for it.

And I never said the prequels were great because they were popular. Just that their continued success and the fact that the general critical consensus (even for Episode I) leans more toward the positive flies in the face of the bitter, smug, sneering fanboys who insist Lucas fell flat on his face with the films.

Titanic made billions but i'd hardly call that the last word in movie making. Star Wars or not i don't care, a bad movies a bad movie at the end of the day. I'll take Kubricks 2001 any day over Star Wars. By the way thanks for the stereotype. Add in pretentious and you'll be spot on.

All three prequels have fresh ratings at Rotten Tomatoes (admitedly, I and II just make the cut, but hardly the critical bloodbath we'd been made to believe). Worldwide, the prequel trilogy made billions. Yet somehow self-satisfied netgeeks still act as if Lucas fell flat on his face with these films. If people geniunely hated these films, no matter how crazy they once were for Star Wars, they'd have forgotten about these films long ago. So why do they still care? Schadenfruede. Doesn't matter that the the trilogy go mostly good reviews, or it made billions. Overweight, socially and vocationally-challenged geeks still need to dwell on these movies to distract them from the realities of their failed and useless lifes. Face it, if you had a social life or an interesting career life, you wouldn't care that these films were bad. To make clear, nothing against people who simply don't like them. It's just the obsessiveness and hyperbole (worst films ever!) that are dead givaway. As someone once said, there are fans of Star Wars, and fans of complaining about Star Wars.

I love the PT, and I can't really understand why some people hate it SO MUCH. They completely ignore the brilliant parts. Sure, the PT has it's flaws, but to say "It's the worst film I have ever seen", I will never understand that. Rent A Sound of Thunder, dude.

I had my little PT hate phase. After seeing it with friends who hated it, they kind of brainwashed me a little and I was disappointed with the movie...but then I brainwashed myself back within a few weeks and ever since I have been an unapologetic fan. I don't care what anybody says.

It is easy to understand why people don't relate to the characters in the PT as in the OT. In the 4-6 the characters are REBELS, hence the REBELLION. Luke,Han,and Leia are your classic underdogs everyone loves to route for. In the 1-3 Anakin,Obi-Wan,and Padme are individuals of power and the sith are the underdogs, they are much more difficult to relate to for the common viewer. It seems rather difficult for the viewer to understand Anakin's plight being the chosen one and all. The OT characters just give people a good vibe. The reason are heroes in the OT are so feisty and so full of personality in the OT is because they are Rebellious, Han Solo for pete's sake embodies everything of the rebellious spirit people love. The love story in AOTC is represented as 2 teenagers in love who don't know what they are doing the dialogue represents the awkwardness in the forbidden love, with Han and Leia their is nothing forbidden and they are much older and you get a much more mature romance, and they both have nothing to lose. The jedi are rightfully represented as arrogant. Some feel the jedi are too wooden in the prequels, the jedi are not supposed to express much emotion, they are always to be calculating and having to clear their minds. People don't want to admit it, but they wanted a carbon copy of 4-6 when that would be absurd because it takes place in a time or REBELLION, and the events going on in 1-3 are completely different yet so similar it amazes me when fans complain about the PT not having a Han Solo type, some people have really missed the boat with their assessments!

jantheman wrote: I love all the Star Wars movies. It kind of upsets me that so many people seem to dislike Episode II. It's my favorite of the prequels, & my second-favorite of all six (after Empire....) I always saw Hayden Christiansen's acting style as a deliberate choice to portray him as "out of place" in his environment, kind of like the way Jarod was portrayed on The Pretender. Anyway, Episode II is awesome! The last 45-minutes or so of AOTC are the best part of the entire PT, but as a whole Sith is the best of the three.

I love all the Star Wars movies. It kind of upsets me that so many people seem to dislike Episode II. It's my favorite of the prequels, & my second-favorite of all six (after Empire....) I always saw Hayden Christiansen's acting style as a deliberate choice to portray him as "out of place" in his environment, kind of like the way Jarod was portrayed on The Pretender. Anyway, Episode II is awesome!

Great stuff Gabe! I actually like the last half of ROTS! My major problems with the PT are: 1. Killing off Darth Maul! Gabe's ideas on how he could of been used in AOTC and ROTS are great! I would have had him in the Dooku role and had Dooku as a back up character who only gets his hands dirty against Yoda etc. 2. Three words Jar Jar Binks! 3. The whole Jango-Boba-clone story arc horrible! In the OT I always loved the mysterious Judge Dredd esc factor that we never saw what Boba looked like! That was totally ruined in a really bad way in the PT! 4.The number one really bad thing and this in my opinion is unforgivable is the poor inexcusable script writing by the bearded wonder! He wrote all 6 episodes and yet completely ignored ROJ when he wrote ROTS! When Padme gives birth to the twins and instantly dies I couldn't believe it! How could Lucas have totally ignored/forgotten Leia and Luke's discussion about their real parents in ROJ! I still cannot believe how sloppy this is! Or is there a hidden agenda and a new Ultimate Edition of the OT is in the works?! If this is the case then the force is lost on the entire Star Wars franchise for me!

Something that also suprises me about the three prequal films is that those who love them seem to dislike Clones the most. Watching it, of the three films I find that one closest in style to the original trilogy

The point I was making with the kiddie-movie vs. grown up-movie was more to decribe the feeling I had than as a "true" statement.

I agree both OT and PT can be labelled "kiddie". I also agree such "labelling" is pointless.

For instance I saw the first "Babe" film last week and it struck me as an incredibly well-made piece of entertainment, far removed from the sentimental "kiddie"-stuff I feared.

But when I went to see Star Wars or Empire, I was a kid and these movies were being seen by predominantly adults (not like your average Disney) so you already felt cool and a bit tough for watching it. In Star Wars: "Wow, that guy's arm got chopped off!". In Empire, eh..: "Wow, Luke's arm just got chopped off!" Which was, confess it, very adult for that time!

Seeing "Menace" as a thirty-year old it was the opposite, because we had to (sort of) apologize to fellow grown-ups for watching it.

Also, in the Netherlands we received "Menace" a full three months after the US did, meaning the negative backlash had already struck over the internet, so you had to apologize even more! I wish I got money from every person telling me this movie was bad weeks before it premiered over here.

I own all of them on DVD by the way. Flaws and all, these six are all stellar (haha!) examples of epic entertainment.

My point was more that age has hardened some peoples enjoyment of the prequals which was not a problem when they watched the originals as kids. The fact that young children seem to love the prequals without any problems is testament to that.

For everyone's information, Harrison Ford wanted Han to die in ROTJ, but Lucas refused. To be honest I find the definition of kids films and adult films rather odd, some films are aimed at a large audience some at a more specific audience.

I feel relieved to know I am no longer alone. For years I've had to hide my true feelings (Sith style:D). At last there is a forum to express my delusions. Someone earlier said that the problem they had with the Prequal Trilogy is that the OT was adult films they watched as a kid and the PT were kids films they watched as an adult. I think that is a mistake. OT are kids filmed watched as kids and PT are kids films watched as adults (although Sith stretches that a little bit). This I think can be perfectly summed up by the fact that every kid I know who when they watched the PT were of the same age as I was when I first watched the OT absolutely loved the film and has collected all the merchandise just like I did with the originals. Age has made us more cynical. I would be willing to bet if a lot of the people who hate the PT were watching the OT for the first time at their current age they would be heaping many of the complaints on them that they heap on the PT.

The theater you saw Star Wars in was different than the one I saw The Phantom Menace in, because when I first moved to Phoenix in '99 they were building it. I believe (don't quote me) that the other theater wasn't actually attached to the mall itself. I actually remember the ice rink, I think, from when I was younger and I'd visit Phoenix from Tucson. Unfortunately they don't have s**t on their website, so I'm not sure.

MetroCenter? Man o man I can't tell you how much time I spent in that mall. Years ago the arcade was an ice skating rink and there used to be a Farrell's Ice Cream restaurant on the 2nd level across from what is now a food court. Anyways, I actually saw Star Wars in that theatre way back in 77 when my family first moved to Glendale. This is the 2nd throwback moment this week. The 1st was when Zach Braff mentioned Campus Sub Shop in South Orange, New Jersey but I digress.

Gabe, loved the write up. The pitfalls of writing history for Lucas were many and there was no way in Tatooine that he was going to make the movies that everyone wanted. The prequels are good but like anything else when you start with the best part of a story, usually the ending, anything that comes before it is anticlimatic. Thanks for the article. Keep em coming.

Gabe Powers: I've never had a particular problem with Hayden Christianson's whiny portrayal of teenaged Anakin Wow - someone else that didn't mind Hayden's portraly of Anakin. I didn't like his acting at first but over time, I grew to appreciate his attempt at acting with the poorly written scripts he had to deal with.

Great stuff Gabe! I am happy to use my 4000th post on a Star Wars related article!

(Since I have reached this milestone, do I look in my mailbox to see my free Matrix Trilogy HD box set? As I am in the backward place of Australia, I am not allowed to enter the competition )

Finally someone else who feels the way I do. I'd even go a bit further to say that the original trilogy is on the same level of the prequel trilogy, in the acting anyways and maybe a few other things to.

Gabe Powers wrote: Sorry, no good guys die. Really, Han, Lando, and/or Leia should've bought it. Lando having to ram The Millenium Falcon into the heart of the reactor on the second Death Star in order to detonate it would have been perfect.

yeah i know what you mean...its nice to have at least one hero die in a finale, makes it more meaninful and shows the stakes were high..... thats why i love anya's death in the final buffy episode.....so many people complained at how meaningless it was treated but i loved that....this was a giant finale battle, not everyone gets a slow, heroic death...some people just buy it out of the blue and it goes on...but i'm off topic now..lol

but yeah i think have a major death in jedi would have made it more impactful, or least have han die in empire so that the actions of jedi are more personal

Incredible editorial. I really, REALLY had a blast reading it. Probably one of the most clever opinion pieces i've read on the net in at least a year. I also agree with the previous posters saying ROTS is the best of the bunch. I swear to god I almost let out a tear when Ewan said "You were my brother Anakin. I loved you." Brilliant.

Jedi feels so safe to me. In that regard, it's similar to Attack of the Clones, where the whole time it seemed like Lucas was compromising. "You didn't like the last one? Okay, here come the Clone Wars! And Boba Fett! And Yoda fights!" By the time he got to Episode III, he figured he couldn't please most people and just did his own thing.

Revenge of the Sith and Empire Strikes Back are so incredibly closed for me. Empire's the more balanced film, but I think Sith has moments of sheer awe, and the last 45 minutes are the best of any Star Wars film.

It was just a joke, the scare is from something entirely unrealated to Star Wars (though if I told you what it was from some people might beg to differ with me). I think Serenity was a great film, I just didn't enjoy it as much as ROTS, especially after the shock of my first viewing was gone. I like it more than TPM, and about the same as AOTC.

And truthfully ROTJ is still my second favorite, but mostly for the last act. I'll always love the cutting between stories (something Matrix Revolutions could've used).

Nic Mall wrote: Haven't read it yet as I'm supposed to be working. But the pictures made me laugh. You look like the kid from the Tazmania cartoons (the cavemanboy who keeps trying to kill Taz) It was the '80s my friend, that was a popular haircut. Thankfully I have no pictures of my follow up do, a rat tail. Barf.

I really don't get the intense love for "Star Wars", be it the prequel and original trilogies. I pretty much love the only "Star Wars", "The Empire Strikes Back" and "The Phantom Menace" (I refuse to acknowledge the prequels' connections to the original films), but that's pretty much it. Thought "Attack of the Clones" was one of the worst movies I ever seen, with the stilted dialogue and ludicrous plot developments and "Return of the Jedi" was highly disappointing (although Carrie Fisher in that slave girl outift was a definite highlight). "Revenge of the Sith" was okay... highly overrated I thought, but perfectly watchable.

Although Gabe, I'm still going to disagree with you on ROTS and "Serenity" -- the latter was economically paced, featured more sympathetic and well-rounded characters and looked like a $100 million picture when it only cost $40 million to make.

But did you file a suit against the kid who cut you on the neck? I certainly would.

The prequels were a lose/lose situation. Much of the fandom that surrounds these films is what people have created in their own imaginations about how everything came to be prior to A New Hope. You make something that doesn't come remotely close to what someone has imagined fore years, a serious letdown was inevitable by some.

I agree with Matt, TPM kicks the c**p out of RoTJ any day of the week and Sith ranks just slightly behind Empire for me.

I can only speak for myself, but I'm being 100% honest here, I really do like these movies, and propbably watch them at least once every year. I think you have a very valid point, just like any other fan phenomenon there are going to be people who aren't going to be honest with themselves about how much they actually like the films.

I don't believe all that c**p about high expectations when it comes to disliking the prequels, If anything i think people tried harder to like them simply because it's Star Wars and like myself went to see say TPM twice because i couldn't believe a Star Wars movie could be so bad or boring. Theres alot of denial involved here.

No matter how much you love or hate the PT, I think everyone can agree that they were missed opportunities. Obviously I think some people are over-exaggerating here saying that the PT are the worst films that they have ever seen (obviously they've only watched 6 films then, the OT and the PT). One thing I must disagree on is the claim of it being a saga of six films, I see it as two trilogies, and they don't really work being watched back to back unless it is 4-6, 1-3. I think the biggest problem with the PT is that they just stand as an introduction to the events of the OT rather than being standalone films in their own right. Arguing with PT haters is like arguing with Creationists that evolution exists, it's just never going to end.

I agree with keeping maul alive for more films, as it seemed liked Grievous and Maul were fillers, there should have been more dooku he was a great character. Maybe Dooku and Maul versus some Jedi in AOTC at the end.

This is funny cause I just rewatched the Prequel Trilogy this week and i have a new found respect for the films. I never was crazy about them and I have always worshiped the Original Triolgy. But now i have to say i really like the new films. The acting might be horrid and the special effects may be a little over the top, and dont get me started on Jar Jar Binks, but regarldess, Lucus knows how to write great sci-fi and the story is the essence of these 6 films. I really like all 6 films.

Darth Maul had so much potential in it! I wanted to like him so much as everyone else did. But, Lucas just threw him in there as filler like everything else in the prequels! I definitely agree that he shouldn't have died so soon. And the way Lucas cut him from the rest of the trilogy was so lame. Stand above Obi Wan and make sparks with your lightsaber to intimidate him enough to let go and fall to his death. Then let Obi Wan flip over you and you go, 'huh? what?' and then you get cut in half! Weak. Christopher Lee's Dooku could have been cool too since Lee is such an accomplished actor! And that name is so silly! What did we get for additional Sith Lords! Grievous is so useless! When it comes to the one on one lightsaber duels in the prequels, Lucas had completely lost it. The final battle between Obi Wan and Anakin was just redundant in choreography! And all that unnecessary flailing around of the lightsabers in figure eight was just overdone. Nick Gillard could have done better than that!

Great read, Gabe.... fantastic stuff for a Star Wars dork like myself. I totally agreed with the idea of having kept Maul around longer... (I think we all did).

you get major kudos (do they even still use that word anymore) for the whole Anakin killing Maul instead of Dooku, idea.... Seriously, I bet if Lucas himself read this article he'd probably smack himself on the forehead.

I totally loved "Menace, and Revenge"..... but, I'm sorry dude, no matter how hard I try, "Clones" just doesn't do it for me.

A great article indeed, but I still found the PT to be boring as hell. Haven't seen Phantom Menace since opening night in the theater, fell asleep in the theater during Attack of the Clones and turned the DVD of Sith off at least five times to check hockey scores. The computer effects were horrid in the first two films and the acting was like cardboard. The original (computer effects-less) trilogy will only be the ones I ever watch. But, to each his own.

Interesting article to be sure. I agree with all your points about the strengths of the first three films. I saw TPM 5 times at the cinema, as I just loved the stronger parts of the films (I too am a guy who'll watch films for certain parts, enduring the weaker elements for the sake of those moments). While I'm not sure about some of your proposed changes, I think we'd all agree that killing Darth Maul was a huge mistake, and I love your ideas of how to keep him in the series.

Great article, Gabe. I like the prequels too and I'm not ashamed to admit it either. I saw TPM in New York before it was released in the UK and managed to convince my mate to start his stag do at 9:30am on the day ROTS was released before we caught the plane to Prague in the afternoon

Sorry this propaganda could never persuade me to believe, the new Star Wars movies are even remotley watchable.

Phantom Menace is one of the worst movies I've watched. I remember watching it in the cinema for a second time (dragged along!) with the worst headache I've suffered. The DVD should come free with a tub of paracetamol.